Info needed: correct colours for WWII Aust vehicles

[Mrs Vampire]

To Take them one at a time.

The vickers was painted in three layers of paint. The 1930s paint was standard dark green as shown on the Pucka vehicle and the colour it is currently painted at Duxford. There were sufficient panels when removed to show its original from the factory colour and the subsequent layers. All the layers until its last sandy colour were dark green like british 1930s green

The final coat was post 1942 desert sand colour very much the same as the light stone mix suggested by Mike Cecils mix. It had been used as a small arms target vehicle and had quite a few coats of that colour overpainted.
The vehicle is on display at duxford and painted in colours that match its appearance in 1940 photographs...that is a very dark green .

I am quite confident they were army supplied paint not local purchases. The colours match the unit orders. Local purchase paint BTW was not something easily done in the forties and oil paints uncommon and expensive ( in the era of calsomine ) due to quite stringent rationing of such things. ( the archives show even vehicle manufacturers had difficulties with paint quality many complaints of poor adhesion and easily marked paint being recorded,,,,the formula standards were changed substantially ) I think it would have been much easier to get it through the unit supply chain and the war diaries and files indicate that is what they did.( see my earlier reference to the archive files which are viewable on line) Mixing up a local colour likewise doesn't make sense to me as I would imagine the unit got the paint in cans flipped the lid and brushed it on .

My Information is from the artifact itself. I am attempting to make sense from what the artifact is telling me compared to current information. So far there is a disparity sufficiently large to have me hesitant to make a final choice.

The FGT has three cabinets in the rear and two on the floor between the rear and front spaces. All of those cabinets have original factory painted finishes. There are no layers of paint on paint just the original factory finishes. Given the cabinets have been closed nearly all of their life I think little fading has happened.

That paint is congruent with a NOS sump guard I have. It is also congruent with the layer of paint directly over the American olive drab paint on my Stuart.
The Stuart was received in US Olive drab Nov 1942. It was immediately subjected to a modification program which entailed fitting various things in it and welding bits and pieces on to it then being repainted . The rub back reveals the paint used was certainly 1942/43 green. That green is substantially different from the green produced from the suggested humbrol mix even allowing for fading.

I understand from the archives my Stuart was modified in a facility in Melbourne.

My Stuart was then transported to Queensland being received in Feb of 1943 by the 13 Armoured regiment. This is about the time the disruptive camouflage order was issued. The Stuart then took part in beach landing exercises around Bribie island with other elements of the 3rd armored including the 2nd 4th. Photographs to hand show 2nd/4 Stuarts engaged in the same exercise, at point of entrainment and in action, painted in two tone Disruptive paint. This is congruent with paint existent on My Stuart.

The evidence from the artifact shows the Disruptive scheme was Light stone painted over the single coat of green paint applied at the time of the modification program . The Light Stone was applied, roughly , by brush. Rubbing back the Stuart indicated the disruptive pattern follows quite closely the drawing in the orders of the time ( Archive reference previous)

I conclude the vehicles of the 3rd Armoured division were all painted in Disruptive camouflage in the early months of 1943 prior to their engagement in exercises around Bribie island.
The Light Stone on My Stuart is sufficiently thick so that, with careful rubbing back, unfaded parts are visible and there are areas around the grouser rail and so on that make me reasonably confident that it is very different to the sandy colour obtained from the Humbrol Mix. The 1940s black and white photos show what appears to be a very pale disruptive colour.
Indeed the Humbrol mix is very reminiscent of the top coat on my Vickers when I purchased it but Humbrol 121 is very much like the disruptive paint on my Stuart
My next step is I think to remove one of the locker doors from the FGT and get some kind of colour analysis done. I would be grateful to hear from anyone knowing someone who does that .
I am very grateful for all of your insights and suggestions....I have unfortunately become a top twenty micron fanatic...

I would like the appearance of my vehicles to appear as far as is possible as they would have appeared in june of 1943 during exercises in Queensland.
I would like to know more about the manufacture of My FGT.... It was made in 1942 but I don't know where.

[Mrs Vampire]

These 2/4the GM Diesel Grants on the way from Northern NSW to Murgon in Qld to join the 3rd armored Div clearly show the two tone disruptive scheme and how contrasting the light stone was with the green.

It roughly matches what My stuart looks like. The rub back shows two starkly contrasting colours.

[Mrs Vampire]

Spartan paint chart 1943

[cliff]

Gina I admire your quest to get things exactly right as per 1943 and wish you luck on this quest.

[Mrs Vampire]

Tanks Cliff

there are some great sketches in the archive...really cute.

[Lynn Eades]

Gina, Is this your Vickers LT?
If so this is her, as she was, on 24th July this year.

[Darrin Wright]

With my restoration I was fortunate to be able to borrow a little colour book, produced in Jan 43, from a fellow VMVC member. I had the light stone colour sample matched at the paint shop and now have 4Lt of light stone paint for my camouflage pattern on my BGC.

The light stone was matched up very close to Champagne Y52.

I did get paint sample cards from the hardware store that were of a similar match to the main colours in the little sample book. They are a guide for later.

Most good automotive paint shops will have a colour sample book (these books have 1000s of shades in them) that can be used to place over the sample colour and this chip has a code. This code will then allow the paint place to make the paint for you.

Records mention paint colours, but I don't know of any old paint formulas, and I doubt that they would translate to modern paint codes/formulas of today. My understanding is that units ordered the paint and mixed it and thinned it down with what they had at hand. This method would produce varying results, but as long as it was within shades of the sample book, I think they would have been happy.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Gina Vampire

The evidence from the artifact shows the Disruptive scheme was Light stone painted over the single coat of green paint applied at the time of the modification program .

There may be more than one camo scheme present Gina, which is often the case on tactical vehicles spanning '42-'43, as the official camo scheme changed several times during this period. For example, if the Stuart was repainted on arrival with 13 Armd Regt circa Feb '43 it would be expected to receive the November '42 camo scheme: Vehicle Dark Green / Vehicle Light Grey. It's possible we're seeing traces of that scheme in your photos, as there appears to be a band of light grey applied directly over Light Stone, followed by dark green. You need to do some more rubbing back to identify all colours present. I find the best method is to rub back small patches and take close up pics of the paint layers, as seen below. This reveals the repaint history chronologically, which enables the various camo schemes to be separated and identified.

Gina's Stuart 1 - Copy.jpg

FGT8 paint history.jpg

[Mrs Vampire]

Good Idea Tony I will do it .

I am at this point fairly certain the build is grey primer, US olive drab, Australian 1942 green , Light Stone disruptive , 1970's Australian army green ( put on by me) . The history of the Stuart does not auger for more than one coat of OZ paint. It was only used from Feb to October 1943 then put into storage until sold of post war.

I spent today plotting the pattern and its nothing like any of the drawings in the orders. All of the disruptive light stone is brush painted on with lots and lots of runs. Looks like it was done double quick .

[Tony Wheeler]

I'm amazed you can find any pattern at all with those paint runs Gina! Fortunately you can take a bit of license with camo patterns, main thing is to get the colours right. Like you I'm extremely fussy on that subject. In due course I plan to match the '42 factory camo on this door and establish the formula for these two colours with one of the reputable paint companies. Need to expose a large area for accurate matching and give them the whole door, none of this small component nonsense. I don't care how long it takes or how much it costs but I won't settle for anything less than a perfect match, because once it's done it will never have to be done again. I've had a gutful of chasing WWII paint specs and it's ridiculous that we have to reinvent the wheel every time we want to paint a vehicle. These are standard factory colours, just like any modern car colour, and there's no earthly reason why we can't simply ring up and order them. Imagine if panel beaters had to go through this paint matching rigmarole for every minor repair.

1942 factory camo.jpg

[Mrs Vampire]

Great to hear Tony. I am in urgent need of the green as I have started on small components already .

So count me in ony any effort to get it right .

The exact edges of the disruptive camo on the Stuart are not possible to find ...well some are... but the general pattern is still there. I can get to within a few inches of the edges doing a sort of join the dots exercise.

It is very clear the pattern is nothing like those in the archive orders. I am happy with that given the Camo committee was not really established until August 1942 and I suppose by the time My Stuart was painted things were still a bit of a work in progress. Archive photos tend to suggest some variation in the actual patterns.

As to the colours I agree with you they would have been standard. I disagree with suggestions that there was variation on account of local purchases/mixtures.

Two of the main aggregation of tanks on the East coast at that time were around Narrabri in NSW and Murgon in Qld ....I just don't see the local Bunnings of the time having the couple of hundred litres of paint needed to paint the fleet disruptive. Paint was strictly rationed at the time and Oil Based paints of the type used was not at all common .

The army managed to get food Building material ammo and fuel out to the camps ...it seems to me getting some paint into the supply chain would have been easy enough.

The Archive does speak about paint shortages at one point but the order is to delay the process of applying disruptive paint until stocks are available and until that happens to only paint vehicles that have an immediate operational need. No where in the archive is an order to source stocks locally .

So I am with you on the Army using paint manufactured in bulk by the leading paint companies of the day to laid down specifications ....as the little Australian Standards pamphlet above indicates.

Which has a fascinating side effect: if you search for it on line it comes up ! but only to take you to a scam site that leads you to a junk PDF converter....

[Mike Cecil]

Gina,

"No where in the archive is an order to source stocks locally" Actually, not correct: earlier instructions (late 41/early 42) than the period you are talking about do provide latitude to source outside the Army supply chain due to Army's inability to provide paint to units in a timely manner.

Interesting discussion.

Remember, the patterns were not rigid, but provided as a guide only, so lots of variations resulted.

Mike

[Mrs Vampire]

Mike I haven't seen that one...I have only acessed the digitised material.

Can you clarify...would that be to paint uncamouflaged civilian vehicles and glossy Army vehicles?

Does it refer to disruptive ?? which I had thought was not introduced on vehicles until late 1942 early 1943.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

earlier instructions (late 41/early 42) than the period you are talking about do provide latitude to source outside the Army supply chain due to Army's inability to provide paint to units in a timely manner.

Very interesting Mike, I wasn't aware paint outsourcing was ever permitted. However it can only have been in anticipation of potential shortage of the new colours introduced in the instruction, not Khaki Green / Light Stone, both of which had long since entered large volume supply in Australia. The instruction itself is predicated on ample supply of this colour combination, featuring in 5 of the 7 schemes specified, and ordered into new vehicle production. In other words no shortage of Light Stone disruptive was anticipated, and as we saw during the next seven months it was running in rivers through every production plant in Australia, being liberally splashed on every vehicle type imaginable! As you say, a little over the top in hindsight!

Three-Tone
1. Light Stone N. Light Brown P. Khaki Green J.
2. Light Green H. Khaki Green J. Black U.
3. Light Stone N. Light Green H. Khaki Green J.
4. Light Stone N. Khaki Green J. Dark Green M.
5. Light Stone N. Light Brown P. Basalt Red S.*
Two-Tone
6. Light Stone N. Khaki Green J.*
7. Light Brown P. Khaki Green J.*

The colour combination selected should approximate to the colours of the country in which it is expected the vehicle will operate.

-For Australian Coastal areas use Sets No. 2, 3, 4, or 6
-For Australian Central and Northern Areas use Set No.5 or 7
-Set No.1 will merge under almost any circumstances.

[Dianaa]

Originally Posted by Tony Wheeler

... I've had a gutful of chasing WWII paint specs and it's ridiculous that we have to reinvent the wheel every time we want to paint a vehicle. These are standard factory colours, just like any modern car colour, and there's no earthly reason why we can't simply ring up and order them. Imagine if panel beaters had to go through this paint matching rigmarole for every minor repair.

Attachment 67229

This is a problem for panel beaters for eon, but just because it is a factory colour doesn't mean that the new batch will match. Cars left in bright sunshine fade more quickly than cars keps in shade. It is why most good panel beaters will start to formula and will then adjust by eye.

However if you're painting a whole vehicle then the formula should be correct.

Can we start a locked sticky section where we can send current formula/brand (even if its a new match) to a moderator who'll post the specific formula. That way we could go direct to the post/thread and not have to wade through pages of discussion?

[Mrs Vampire]

Joining the dots from the bits and pieces I have found on the vehicle this is my current mud map .
The sand guards are purely speculative as they were not on the Tank when it was auctioned off after the war.